Site Philosophy

This site operates as an independent editorial operation. Advertising, sponsorships, and other non-editorial materials represent the opinions and messages of their respective origins, and not of the site operator. Part of the FM Tech advertising network.

As I have written several times in covering this ongoing matter, the FCC has maintained--and one could reasonably maintain--that spectrum regulation is rightly the domain of the feds and that the FCC is the only body that can control spectrum's use. They issued an order to this effect in June 2004 that could hardly be clearer. A landlord usurping that role acts against the federal interest, especially in unlicensed bands, which have requirements for certification and operating parameters, but no restrictions on the party operating services in that band as long as they are within legal guidelines.

Reuters says an order is written and approved by the FCC chair Kevin Martin, and is awaiting likely approval from at least two of the four other commissioners.

Massport's contentions have rested at times on two different grounds. First, Continental was causing interference. That's problematic for a band in which interference is an expected part of operation, and not a cause for shutdown of offending transmitters unless they act outside the legal signal limits. Second, introduced as a later argument, was that vital security purposes would be subverted by having a non-Massport-controlled network in operation. Quite specious given that one would hope that a band that could be disrupted by a balky cordless 2.4 GHz phone wouldn't be the basis of our airport safety. And that hundreds of other airports have no such restrictions or concerns.